Upgrade StorageFootnotes questions
Hi, two questions
1: I'm using OSCOLA. When I add a cross-reference, it shows as (Smith n 2). Is there a way to change the 'n x' part to 'date', so the result would be Smith 2016.
2: When I tried inputting footnotes using both word's own method and zotero's, the list doesn't automatically renumber footnotes correctly after making modifications.
So it seems that renumbering works if you input everything using Zotero.
However, what if I want to mix in footnotes which have no citation referent? (eg 'See Section 4 above'). Presumably, I'd need to do this using Zotero so that everything is able to update correctly as I add / remove citations, but I don't see a way to add 'citation-free' footnotes using Zotero.
1: I'm using OSCOLA. When I add a cross-reference, it shows as (Smith n 2). Is there a way to change the 'n x' part to 'date', so the result would be Smith 2016.
2: When I tried inputting footnotes using both word's own method and zotero's, the list doesn't automatically renumber footnotes correctly after making modifications.
So it seems that renumbering works if you input everything using Zotero.
However, what if I want to mix in footnotes which have no citation referent? (eg 'See Section 4 above'). Presumably, I'd need to do this using Zotero so that everything is able to update correctly as I add / remove citations, but I don't see a way to add 'citation-free' footnotes using Zotero.
2. Footnotes should definitely renumber when you mix them with Word footnotes (in fact, Zotero footnotes _are_ technically inserted by Word); you don't have to do everything in Zotero. Does the failure to update footnote numbers happen reliably? Are you using track changes? That can potentially affect Word footnotes (irrespective of Zotero)
2. I did have a long document in which I couldn't get renumbering to work - no tracked changes, and I tried all sorts of refreshing strategies I saw on this forum
But I did just play around with a new document, using a mix, and adding / deleting things, and it does all update correctly. So I couldn't tell you why, but it seems no, the failure is not reliable.